games that should have NEVER EVER been made

[-Dragmire-]

"here is a place to discuss games that were total pieces of money wasting shit..."

Unlimited Saga - for destroying the potential of a great story with awful gameplay.

 

[Aprilgold]

inFamous, inFamous 2, Okami Wii, Command & Conquer 4, and Sonic 4.
First four shouldn't exist at all, and the last one should just have a different name because it isn't actually anything that a logical person would call Sonic 4. It's more like Sonic Rush 3 or something.

Why? I mean why should those games never have been made? Okami Wii version is understandable, but what about the others? I can understand theres reasons to hate things, but without a reason, then its sorta.... Not hate but dislike, so why shouldn't they have been made again?

 

[Evill_Bob]

It's funny that when asked about horrible games or games that should never been made they automatically aim for some popular game that is a rival of some other popular game series. When I think of a game that should never have been made or just plain out horrible I think of games that pleased nobody. The Call of Duty series may be cancer eating away at the core shooters like Duke Nukem, Unreal, and Half-Life but it is a good solid game that never fails to please (though it does get costly buying the newest version every year). Halo has earned its right to be among shooters; it has been around nearly as long as Half-Life and Unreal and has delivered a gold performance with nearly every game. It has been around so long that the updated version of Halo CE will be played by long time Halo fans who never got a real chance to play the game back in its prime. None of these games have done anything to be thrown in with the world?s worst game, E.T., and not even the newer Sonic games can be classified as a bad game. On that note Sonic fell from grace about the moment everything went 3D but the modern games still have entertainment value. They may not be the best games out there but if rummaging through a bargain bin and you find a Sonic game and have a weekend to kill you could do a lot worse. The only games that could be classified as truly bad are those that kill a series or a developer with one swift stroke. So yeah: E.T. the game.

 

[krazykidd]

Any game based on a movie, ever.

what about Golden eye 007?

Edit: So after reading most of the posts, I've come to the conclusion that , i read this thread wrong and its bassically a ' games you hate thread ' OR people are answering it wrong and are calling out games they hate instead of games that should have never been made.

AnywaYS my answer is , Superman64 ( yes i did buy this ) i think i win ( or lose depending on how you see it )

 

[duktapeman90]

Um, none. If we don't make mistakes we'll never learn. Also, no matter how bad you think a game is, there's always someone who loves it, so up yours for wanting to take that away form them!

 

[DanielBrown]

Fracture

Granted, I didn't get very far - but what I did play showed me that it was a horrible, horrible game.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

Dude, don't be that guy. Because no matter how good my point is, you're not going to be swayed. Ten bucks says you've got half a reply formulated to whatever you think I'm going to say. Just let people *****.

Even if I don't agree, I might still find it an interesting argument. For now, I am just curious.

Fine. Ever since the original Diablo came out Blizzard peaked on that series at 2. Now in this day and age you'll inhabit a lifeless meaningless avatar to depopulate the world of it's cuddly hideous fauna over and over again in a game that feels more like an MMO than anything else. That was great for 2001. Now, they're going to render Diablo 3 in 3D add a few classes finally let people chose their sex (if I remember correctly) but underneath the tweak-like updates it'll still be Diablo and nothing will have changed... and they will make a fortune. It's a good business model, minimum work for maximum profit, but when I think about it I feel a little more hollow inside.

whats so wrong with that?

its the continuation of a game series, why would you change the entire base mechanics of how it plays? that makes no sense. If they charged a subscription charge for it i would definitely frown but its a one time pay for the game which isn't even over priced so i don't see what the problem is exactly..the game is good at what it does?

 

[Quantum Star]

Ninjabread Man. Just, Ninjabread Man.

 

[artanis_neravar]

inFamous, inFamous 2, Okami Wii, Command & Conquer 4, and Sonic 4.
First four shouldn't exist at all, and the last one should just have a different name because it isn't actually anything that a logical person would call Sonic 4. It's more like Sonic Rush 3 or something.

Why? I mean why should those games never have been made? Okami Wii version is understandable, but what about the others? I can understand theres reasons to hate things, but without a reason, then its sorta.... Not hate but dislike, so why shouldn't they have been made again?

The only one I agree with is Command and Conquer 4 and I will tell you why, not only did you have to be online 100% of the time, if you lose the internet for even a second the game boots you. Second and most importantly (I could have lived with the online thing) is that they changed the entire game play. They got rid of the entire base building part of the game, for a single ship that can travel the map and only make one type of thing, Defensive buildings, offensive units, or air units. I didn't like the extreme change and I felt that I missed out on the important story because of the shift in game play. Now I'm not saying they should have tried innovation, but they should have done it in a spin off to see how it worked, not the main game.

 

[AroLombardi]

I hope i`m the first person to say CoD

Thank you.

But really, I just hate any CoD after Modern Warfare. I'll admit, it was a good game because it was original and still good. Then they overmilked it, and now we're at Modern Warfare 3. All the other Call of Duty's had a point because they actually had real history in them, but MW has completely lost that argument. It's just generic shooter number 2 now.

 

[artanis_neravar]

It's funny that when asked about horrible games or games that should never been made they automatically aim for some popular game that is a rival of some other popular game series. When I think of a game that should never have been made or just plain out horrible I think of games that pleased nobody. The Call of Duty series may be cancer eating away at the core shooters like Duke Nukem, Unreal, and Half-Life but it is a good solid game that never fails to please (though it does get costly buying the newest version every year). Halo has earned its right to be among shooters; it has been around nearly as long as Half-Life and Unreal and has delivered a gold performance with nearly every game. It has been around so long that the updated version of Halo CE will be played by long time Halo fans who never got a real chance to play the game back in its prime. None of these games have done anything to be thrown in with the world?s worst game, E.T., and not even the newer Sonic games can be classified as a bad game. On that note Sonic fell from grace about the moment everything went 3D but the modern games still have entertainment value. They may not be the best games out there but if rummaging through a bargain bin and you find a Sonic game and have a weekend to kill you could do a lot worse. The only games that could be classified as truly bad are those that kill a series or a developer with one swift stroke. So yeah: E.T. the game.

Wait, you posted a thoughtful, well written, concise argument that doesn't bash on popular games or sequels? I think you are using the internet wrong

 

[Ryu-Kage]

Games that should never have been made? Duke Nukem Forever! Now the jokes about it are dead!

j/k But seriously, I like the guy that said that games that were made but failed shouldn't necessarily count as ones that shouldn't exist.

That being said, the umpteen different versions of Street Fighter 2 that were made. Maybe one more edition (the original, plus Super Street Fighter 2, where they introduced new characters), and that could've been enough. (I'm not counting the Alpha games in that breath, BTW)

Pretty much anything that Rare made for LJN. Then again, we'd have fewer Angry Video Game Nerd videos without those.

 

[Slenn]

Anyone who's watched the Spoony Experiment knows that Bloodwings Pumpkinhead's Revenge is far far worse than anything else.

 

[Knight Templar]

No, my primary weapon was the mark/tag system that let me instakill everyone in the room. Hiding on a ledge then jumping down and spraying everything with bullets isn't stealth. That's just waiting a little bit before you start shooting.

You only get marks for stealth kills, and you could only get into a location where many targets could be felled using stealth.
If you made the choice to use the "gun-ho avoid stealth as much as I can" method, to make the game both harder and less intresting, then thats not the games fault.

 

[electric method]

There have been a ton of games so bad that they should have never seen the light of day, let alone been foisted upon the gaming community.

My choices would be these; Last gen consoles. Star Wars, The Clone Wars that came bundled with Tetris and Malice. I am sure there are more, I am just forgetting them. This gen, the cell shaded POP game, Two Worlds 1 and 2, Too Human, Heavenly Sword, Section 8 and Lost Planet. I also remember some awful 3d Star Wars shooter on the N64 that was broke beyond belief.

 

[adragonofgold]

I hope i`m the first person to say CoD

First Yes. but not the last.

 

[SteewpidZombie]

-Darksiders (My god...it was like playing a platformer/hack'n'slash that was the alcoholic induced miscarriage of some homeless game designer)

-Too Human (I feel as if I got slightly dumfer as eh pley'ded det gam@#!)

-Starwars: Force Unleashed (WOW...AMAZING...WOAH!...HOLY COW!...I think my guy just did something totally awesome and destroyed that giant mech thing...except that I COULDN'T SEE WITH THIS HORRIBLE CAMERA! AHHHHHHHHHHH!)

-Asassins Creed: Brotherhood/Revelations (One Ubisoft Dev: Okay...so let me get this straight...people have to play as Ezio...two more times...even though he is a boring and one-note character that has basically had his entire backstory summed up in the second AC...seriously?...we...we couldn't like...ya know...visit some OTHER ancestor...cause...there's like hundreds of years...and ancestors we could totally visit...no?...well...maybe people will enjoy playing as the same guy who is less cool then Altair for 3 games straight?)

-Every Final Fantasy After 7 (Why...just...why?)

-Final Fantasy Online (...Square Enix...please just be trolling us at this point...cause I hope to god you're not ser...nope it's been made...THAT'S IT!...I SWEAR TO GOD! IF YOU EVER MAKE ANOTHER FINAL FANTASY ONLINE, I'LL BLOW MY BRAINS OU...OH AND YOU DID IT...I've lost all faith in JRPGs...)

 

[lSHaDoW-FoXl]

Dragon Age 2.

While there are definitely worst games the reason why I put this game as my #1 choice is because it taints the otherwise perfect record bioware has, it's a stain. And justifying it's existence is only justifying them to make more cash grabs. Tell me, do you want Mass Effect 3 to be good or do you want a two second project where every space station, planet, city some reason looks the same?

If you picked the first one then maybe it's best to condemn this game. Seriously, When there exists a more repetitive game then DW - and without the 42 characters - there is a serious problem. The dungeons use the same map, dungeons use the same lay out and the plot is inconsistent. You can enjoy this game all you want but it's clear Bioware got lazy, and by saying it's all right for them to do this your basically promoting them to put less efforts in their games. And if we let them, they will.

 

[Pandabearparade]

Dragon Age 2

 

[WorldCritic]

The upcoming Halo 4

Keep in mind that not all of these are bad games (afterall, how can I judge Halo 4 after one teaser?) I have just listed them here simply for the fact that they have no right to exist at all. For the sequels (and interquel) there was no plot holes to fill, no extra story to tell, so really there was no reason for them to have been made with the exception of
A. Pleasing the fans

im sorry, but i just dont understand your logic AT ALL.

you think pleasing the fans is not a reason to make a sequel?

and if you played Halo 3, you should know that Halo 4 does have a new story to tell.


OT: Wolfenstein (2009) i choose this because it is a game i actually got fooled into purchasing. i thought it looked cool, but i ended up playing it for one day then quitting and never playing again... just terrible

1. From a professional standpoint, if the original creators of something don't want to continue their work but it continues anyway to simply please fans then the motivation can easily be lost in development and what was once good can easily be ruined from there.

2. I played Halo 3 and saw the ending on Legendary and there really isn't a whole new story to tell there. A single epilogue would suffice or maybe just leave it open to interpretation. A whole new trilogy though? Not so much.